DoD version discussion (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames



Message

YohanTM2 -> DoD version discussion (4/5/2006 5:41:13 PM)

Hi All,

Let me start by saying that I have not played DoD3. I am personally a big fan of DoD1 as it allowed for the possibility of variant starts without having to keep playing a political game once World War was underway.

The other really nice advantage was that if it was agreed by all players that the result was skewed you could just setup again and only lost one nights play.

We found DoD2 to be completely unplayable. Way too complex, took too much extra time once the game was underway and frankly skewed the game completely.

I would like to hear what others think and also here from anyone that has played DoD3 a few times.

Rob



SamuraiProgrmmr -> RE: DoD version discussion (4/5/2006 5:54:58 PM)

We loved DOD1. We used to play it using the WIF map and counters. Made for a great start to the game.

I once built the maginot line all the way to the channel and it completely demoralized the Germans because that player wanted 'sure things' on his opening attack. Great fun!

I never played DODII or DODIII. I have read the rules for DODIII and thought it was interesting, but was not sure that it was a major advancement from DODI. (No real opinion.)




mlees -> RE: DoD version discussion (4/5/2006 6:16:32 PM)

I never owned/played DoD I, so I cannot offer an opinion on it. I own DoD2 and 3. Very similar to each other.

I always liked the concept of the various alliances trying to manipulate the minor countries, and I liked the concept of "Alliance levels" that affect cooperation and lend lease levels between the members of an alliance. However, using the DoD2/3 system to acheive these effects seemed kind of awkward.



Ballista -> RE: DoD version discussion (4/5/2006 6:26:33 PM)

Ive played DOD1 (loved it) muiltiple times and DOD2 (a bit more convoluted but still workable) twice. We never used the short- intro game (e.g. the mini map in DOD). We used the full maps and all (it extended the game by a month or two before General War). I even created a variant WWI DOD (started in J/F 1911) that covered things like the Balkans Wars and such for use in CWJs Fatal Alliances WWI mod. Fun stuff indeed, but definitely beyond the current scope set down. Maybe someday...... :D



Matt242 -> RE: DoD version discussion (4/6/2006 1:44:18 PM)

I played DoD I and II in the past. Both are worth playing in their own right.

To me DoD III seems to be the ultimate thing on ww2. And it can be converted to WiFFE what increases its value even more! [:)]

Sadly my friends only like WiFFE and still resist trying on DoD III. 'No more complicated rules that make the game even longer' they say. 'I want to move counters and let them fight'...
One day they will give in i hope.

I read the rules several times and like them. However there are some weaknesses. At least in the standalone combat rules.

The rules are written in an almost narrative style. You find many examples on important matters but several circumstances aren't foreseen and left to your imagination. It is impossible to cover every possible situation in a "1.0" version of rules.
WiFFe rules were changed many times due to experiences and input from the community. They are written in a very strict style and almost everything can be looked up via an excellent index. DoD III lacks both.

Common sense may rule it all out - but what is common sense in a wargame of this level?

Although the rules are basically simple, adequate application of game effects of options, combat and so on is relatively complex. A matter of practice of course.

Needless to say i hope the community of DoD-lovers will grow - the game offers freedom of activity never seen before and a group can set the pace of growing tension themselves.

One game could lead to war quickly, another one with intense application of (London Naval) treaties, major power treaties, trade agreements and the "League of Nations Option" may develop into a long lasting game with great impact of role playing and so many alternate ends. Everything in between is also possible.

Appeasement, aggression, war and peace, diplomacy and search for power... World history and DoD III offer it alike and there isn't the single one perfect strategy anymore.

I love this game. Compared to it's precedessors it is a great step forward. Some fine tuning on special rules could make it the final answer.



YohanTM2 -> RE: DoD version discussion (4/6/2006 7:11:52 PM)

Question Matt,

Can you end DODIII when the full war begins and switch to just the FE game? If so, I would have some interest. If not, not a hope, the game is long enough already.

Please advise,

Rob



Matt242 -> RE: DoD version discussion (4/6/2006 8:17:04 PM)

Hello Rob!

Yes, you can convert a DoD III into WiFFE at any time. The only prerequisite is that all players agree to do so.

Since DoD only uses army and naval points, the DoD rules exactly state how to convert them into land, air and naval units, where they set up and so on. You can even convert the offensives into territories to hex gains on the WiFFE map.

The easiest way to continue the game would be to keep up the political step from DoD. So you can keep track of minors, their attitudes and behaviour. Wars could still be declared (and some other otions played as well) during the action step (reactionary war etc).

Playing without DoD after conversion:
Players may find it difficult to judge which minors are available for alignment. If Rumania, for example, went into the camp of the democrats (which is unlikely but possible), Germany may never be able to align it (as per 19.6.2 RAW), simply because other countries may have that choice instead - when going to war with a MP of another ideology. This could happen before Germany meets the prerequisites told in WiFFE.

To put it bluntly: Minors would only be available for alignment if the respective MP achieved the necessary prerequisites during play period of DoD. The rest would be standard fare as RAW.

This requires players to be quite keen and concentrate on the minors they do definitely want to get in camp (guarantee/alliance) until general war breaks out / conversion shall take place.

The trade agreements of 5.1 RAW should be replaced by the situation when conversion took place. If a MP did not invest in time - he will never get the resources he usually receives.

It is a trade off: If keeping up the political step, the game will become somewhat slower but everything will be smooth and in motion.
If dropping DoD entirely after conversion some - even many - minors will stay neutral (no one could actually align them) - a fact to be bemoaned by some players.
"...and i had them so close..."

You can find the conversion rules in the rule booklet of DoD III, pages 53, 56, 57.
If you do not have it, ADG offers it as a free download on their homepage:

Go to: Australian Design Group


Hope this helps you a little.



YohanTM2 -> RE: DoD version discussion (4/6/2006 10:35:46 PM)

Thanks Matt!



TheDishwasher -> RE: DoD version discussion (4/7/2006 1:49:36 AM)

I never played DOD1, played a little DOD2 and played a lot of DOD3.

DOD3 is great is you don't push it too far. I really like the way it can create a completely different game however, if you drift too far from the historic (by using the option that allows major powers to change ideology for example) it falls apart quickly.



Matt242 -> RE: DoD version discussion (4/7/2006 7:57:44 PM)

Agree completely.

That is exactly the reason for this to be optional. Guess it's just for the real hardcore gamers who already got bored with virtually everything.

To me, balance and so on would totally go wild. This is also the name of the option if i remember it right.

The funny thing about it would be "to go out fishing for minors" in the neutral zone. You certainly got my cent. [;)]



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.296875